To the Editor:

Re “The Economy We Need” (Sunday Review, July 5):

Thank you for the collection of passionate and informed essays on the need for a radical restructuring of our capitalist economy so that it will work for the many and not only the few. But one crucial point was omitted: the need to restructure the economy so that it is environmentally sustainable and conducive to continued life on our planet. Without this restructuring, all the necessary work toward economic and racial justice will be moot.

How short our memories! Was it not just a year ago that Greta Thunberg sailed the sea and students around the world were on strike about climate change? The economy must be just — and it must be green. The two are inseparable. We need them both.

James Berger
New Haven, Conn.

To the Editor:

Re “An Agenda for Change” (editorial, Sunday Review, July 5):

Thank you for listing initiatives that would make the United States a fairer and better country for everyone. Much of it is a spending list, though, and not complete unless there are specifics about where the money would come from.

You refer to other countries with better social services and health care but don’t mention that people pay significantly higher taxes to make those services possible. Until we stop thinking of taxes as a penalty to avoid and view them as a collective budget to use for our own benefit, I don’t see the feasibility of most of these great ideas.

Paying higher taxes and cutting back on the obscene military budget do not have widespread support in this country, and the notion of redistribution of wealth has never been in the American psyche.

Gale G. Hannigan
Albuquerque

To the Editor:

It’s striking that in your editorial statement about what America needs to do to repair itself, your only reference to higher education is that universities should stop favoring the children of alumni. I would argue that expanded federal and state funding for public universities — the higher education institutions that currently teach about 75 percent of college attendees (few of whom gain admission because they are “legacies”) — is far more worthy of your attention and support.

Stephen Brier
New York
The writer is a professor of urban education at the Graduate School and University Center, CUNY.

To the Editor:

Your “Agenda for Change” did not address the need for immediate improved care for and treatment of the elderly. Let’s make certain they are able to access and afford higher quality care in nursing homes, rehabilitation facilities and at home and are treated with the dignity and respect they deserve. And this must include options for the middle class as well as the working poor.

Was the recent experience with the pandemic decimating our most vulnerable in unprepared and poorly regulated facilities not enough of a call to action? A more secure, better quality of life for everyone, including the elderly, at every income level is an absolute necessity in a humane society.

Lenore Goldberg
New York

To the Editor:

Your “Agenda for Change” checklist and the articles behind it have resonated with me. However, I do think one essential brick is missing in the foundation of your thesis: revisiting the large accumulation of programs that we have adopted over time as a nation that have ossified into untouchable entitlements. Whether it be farm and other subsidies, oil and gas incentives, and on and on, there are billions to be reapplied if we have the courage to support elected officials who “rework the budget.”

Yes, there will painful choices, but there always are when prioritizing. We can’t just keep adding and never subtracting; the cumulative burden on society is too great. Couple this effort with your checklist and I would agree that we would be repositioning our nation for another century of prosperity.

Steve Fitzgerald
Fraser, Colo.

To the Editor:

Many of the suggestions on your checklist are good ones. But although providing universal prekindergarten for 4-year-olds and requiring employers to pay for family and medical leave would go a long way toward helping families with children, those ideas do not go far enough. Providing fully funded, high-quality child care for infants and toddlers would significantly strengthen the list.

In many localities, child care is prohibitively expensive. Moreover, the importance of high-quality early childhood care has been documented by research showing that much important brain development occurs during the first three years of a child’s life. Lastly, many of the people who do the work of caring for very young children are woefully underpaid.

Universal child care for babies and toddlers would give children a healthy early start, help their parents and ensure that child care providers are properly compensated for their essential work.

Amy Laiken
Chicago

To the Editor:

“The Jobs We Need” (editorial, July 5) is one of the most well-written and economically, culturally and sociologically important editorials I have ever read. All of your points lend themselves to one key theme: Making the United States a fairer, more just, more hospitable country in which to live is as crucial now as it ever was to our nation’s future prosperity.

The Golden Rule has been tarnished, but it can — and will — win out in the end. Greed, selfishness and inhumane treatment are running rampant throughout parts of our culture, but these behaviors must cease if we are to become a truly great country again.

Sorry, President Trump. We have to speak kindly and civilly to one another, even when it seems as though we will never get along. Put partisan politics aside and work together!

If there were more economic equality across the board in America, I am convinced that our society would be a much safer, happier and more loving place in which to live and work. This can be a turning point for America, and I believe that we will rise to the challenge before us. The time is now.

Doug Cook
Prescott Valley, Ariz.

To the Editor:

In “The Jobs We Need,” you compare the economy to a pirate ship whose owners “have gradually claimed a larger share of the booty at the expense of the crew.” If only the economy were like a pirate ship! Pirate crews collectively ran their ships and elected their captains. If American businesses had such a democratic structure, the $1 trillion a year plunder of workers’ wages by the captains of business, described in the editorial, would not have happened.

Rod Hill
Saint John, New Brunswick
The writer is a professor of economics at the University of New Brunswick.

To the Editor:

Re “Reparations Are Owed,” by Angela Glover Blackwell and Michael McAfee (Sunday Review, July 5):

The authors state that banks must “commit to serving Black people as they do whites.” They go on to assert that banks should cancel consumer debt for Black customers; eliminate banking fees for Black customers; provide interest-free mortgages to Black home buyers; and provide interest-free loans to Black-owned businesses.

I would like to know which banks provide those services for white people, because I don’t get any of those services for free even though I am white. If my bank provided those services for free to Black people but not to me, I would find a new bank. I would not appreciate being discriminated against, and I doubt the bank would stay in business for long.

Ralph Kerr
Leander, Tex.